Letters To The Editor

The Daily Press printed a letter Aug. 23 in which the author described his support for a presidential candidate promising to use his business acumen to balance the federal budget in 18 months.

While a worthy goal, balancing the budget is not as simple as balancing the books of a business. The root of the nation's fiscal problems stems from promises made by the government over several generations to provide a package of individual benefits that simply is not sustainable without future, injurious tax increases.

For example, Medicare, which is provided independent of need, currently consumes about 10 percent of the federal budget and has been growing at a rate of 10 percent a year. Overall spending on such mandatory programs has grown from 30 percent of the federal expenditures in 1964 to 63 percent in 1995. Without changes, spending on these programs is estimated to consume all revenues by 2012.

It is important to recognize that these increases are not being consumed by an increasing federal bureaucracy. The number of federal employees has changed little since the late '60s, despite large increases in the country's economy.

Voter acceptance of unrealistic promises has caused much of our current situation, and voters must be skeptical of similar claims in future elections. It is doubtful that sustainable solutions will be either quick or without initial sacrifices by the general population.

The recent rise of the journal-tainment (journalism/entertainment) industry captures large audiences by presenting only the extremes of any situation, encouraging disrespect and mistrust toward people with differing opinions and emphasizing sound-bite solutions to complex problems. Voters must work extra hard to ensure that they are fully informed on issues they consider important.

While the current situation is certainly serious, it is encouraging to recognize that the federal debt was far higher in comparison to the national economy in the years following World War II. By focusing federal expenditures on cost-effective, long-term investments such as improving the national infrastructure, scientific research and education, the nation was able to slowly grow its way out of debt while simultaneously improving the standard of living.

Ken Goodrich

Newport News

VETS UNAPPRECIATED

Your Aug. 25 headline "Langley troops head to Kuwait" was most interesting when related to the small box on Page 5 headlined "VA: Budget cuts may hurt vets."

I am disappointed in the media's lack of concern for veterans. It's the same old story: nothing too good for the troops, and that's what they get.

Veterans and American Indians would be better off in jail or as illegal aliens or fatherless children. Then they would get medical and dental care and might get Social Security even though they made no contributions.

The priorities of politicians are sad. They are totally lacking in integrity but happy as long as their needs are met. Their time will come.

William Johnston

Williamsburg

DESERVES BETTER

The Aug. 28 article written by William McMichael about Gen. Maxwell Thurman was an affront to journalistic integrity.

The number of people in the Army who refer to Gen. Thurman (pejoratively, I might add) as ``Mad Max'' is minuscule, and I would dare say that the majority of that number either don't know him very well or have never met him.

Thurman's successes in Panama pale in comparison to his overall contributions to this nation and the Army at large. If you're going to write about him, spend the time and use the ink to do it right. McMichael's supposed update read more like a premature obituary, and Thurman deserves much, much more than that.

Tony Caggiano

Hampton

INDUCING CONFORMITY

Will someone explain to me why Jim Spencer has been turned loose to preach to us here in Virginia? He is working day and night to turn his beliefs into dogma.

Virginia Military Institute and The Citadel have for 150 years been turning boys into men - the right kind of men who will become responsible citizens. Who would tamper with this except our pandering politicians and the fanatical Spencer?

This smells of a plot to reduce us all to some dreadful type of conformity by an intrusive government.

John Williams

Cardinal

SEEING THE LIGHT

I wasn't surprised by the snide, hypocritical tone of the editorials denigrating Norma McCorvey, after her "defection" from abortion. I knew her lurid past, which received little commentary prior to her conversion, would now be used against her.

The Aug. 12 editorial explains how at 48, McCorvey needn't worry about pregnancy, so she can now decry abortion. Apparently, she couldn't have actually experienced a change of heart, deciding that abortion is morally reprehensible. The editorial neglected to mention that, following years of seeing aborted carcasses stored at her work place, McCorvey couldn't stomach it anymore.

The Aug. 18 barrage concluded that McCorvey "is entitled to espouse whatever views she chooses. But her credibility never has been great. She has abused alcohol and drugs and lied about the circumstances of the pregnancy that made her famous. It's easy for her to tell others what to do now, but she certainly felt differently when she wanted an abortion." In other words, given her deplorable character, why should anyone listen now? But why didn't the media object to her character when she promoted abortion? Incidentally, I don't remember her telling anyone what to do.

McCorvey's vilification will increase as detractors attempt to eradicate her memory as the former heroine of the abortion movement. Personally, I don't consider her a symbol for pro-life, but simply as someone who saw the light of truth and grabbed hold of it. Regardless of her abortion stance, she is important to God, and I wish her his best.